Many misunderstandings of phenomenology can be eliminated if the question of method is distinguished from the intrusive questions of phenomenological philosophy. Today phenomenology is primarily a concept of method, a way of acting; also it in no sense is a “trend” [of thought] because the time of a phenomenological philosophy obviously is past. Phenomenological philosophy as past now belongs with the history of the other trends of philosophy. In the course of time, phenomenology as method has undergone modifications and it remains a possibility for thinking.⁽¹⁾ (Note well: not the only possibility).

Current objections against phenomenology, its further development and application stem partly from the fact that the above distinction is not made. For example, an objection is made against the absence of an acceptable religious motivating force.⁽²⁾ This is an objection that decidedly is valid when phenomenological philosophy is considered, but is not relevant when a method is criticized. For example, evidence of this is that no objection is made against applying the experimental method⁽³⁾ that decidedly cannot lay claim to a religious motivating force. However, on the basis of the absence of a religious motivating force the strongest objection can be made against the philosophical trend known as experimentalism.

On the other hand, a further development that Heidegger views as a [threat to the] life source of phenomenology must be removed as a violation of Husserl-Heidegger and is seen as a parasite aimed at promoting a particular ideology.⁽⁴⁾ The critical reader of this objection will quickly notice that it does not primarily involve scientific considerations but considerations that are mainly ideological (even political) in nature—anything that leads to promoting the Christian-national idea must not occur.

A particularly meaningful development of which users of the phenomenological method must be keenly aware is the idea of meta-theoretical reflection by which phenomenology can be judged on the basis of scientifically accountable criteria such as knowledge, its scientific nature, its life philosophy nature, truth and sense as meaning structures.⁽⁵⁾

Emphasizing the significance of an activity-directed study of educating within a functional climate of thought with the application of the phenomenological method (where this is relevant) and with improving practice as an aim,⁽⁶⁾ must be welcome. Fundamental pedagogics applies phenomenology as a method also for the sake of improving practice⁽⁷⁾ and in this phenomenology, as method, finds additional meaningful reasons for its existence.

In the following attention now is given to:

1. Phenomenology as a method such that it can figure as an aspect of research methodology; 2. Phenomenology-in-function: meaningful connections with the essences of the course of the lesson and modes of learning.

2.1 The phenomenological aim is an ontological understanding of educating, i.e.,

disclosing pedagogical essences;
knowing essences that give meaning to educating;
manifesting pedagogically meaningful ways of living;
uncovering ways of living that are meaningful for becoming a proper adult;
unveiling ways of living that are characteristic of the pedagogical;
unlocking the ontic (concrete-meaningful) characteristics of educating.

2.2 The phenomenological method is a call to thinking from the reality of educating itself, i.e.,

a thinking search for what makes the pedagogical what it is and not otherwise;
thinking that discloses essences;
thinking that eradicates essence blindness;
reflecting as fundamental thinking.

2.3 The phenomenological synthesis

Phenomenology as method requires a rational and affective approach; i.e., it is a knowing and emotional method where this involves rational and signifying disclosing and thus rational and extra-rational interacting. This means it involves a rationally justified scientific necessity and philosophy of life significance as an affective demand.

2.4 Phenomenological means

It is obvious that if the researcher will practice phenomenology as a method, i.e., apply it as an essence-disclosing and essence-verifying entering into and penetrating he must have means for doing this at his disposal. The means at his disposal are the following phenomenological activities (steps of thinking):

These means of disclosing (steps of thinking) are used with the specific aim:

a)  of eliminating everything that impairs or makes impossible the researcher’s approach (bringing nearer) to the educative reality;
b)  to verify the essence-status of a possible essence that he has seen and disclosed; and
c)  to direct self-criticism.

2.5 Phenomenological ways of application

This involves ways of using the phenomenological means. These means can be used as:

• Phenomenological reduction
• Eidetic reduction
• Phenomenological construction

2.5.1  Phenomenological reduction (eliminating activities)

The phenomenological reduction is an attempt to renounce each form of essence blindness. The investigator wants to penetrate (to the essences of) the reality of educating. To be able to do this there first must be an elimination of all forms of essence blindness that might accompany the investigator or what is added to them as concealing.

In terms of the phenomenological means, the forms of essence blindness that must be eliminated are:

• what can be thought away
• what can be acted away
• what is removed after the separating
• the contradictories
• that regarding which the hermeneutic question cannot answer positively
• that which cannot be allocated a place in a triadic (dialectic) structure
• that which from its naming is anti-pedagogical
• that for which no accountable life can be awakened.
• that which cannot be made practical because it works to restrain practice.
• that which cannot possess any categorical status because it really is obscuring and this is all forms of essence blindness.

Various forms of essence blindness have been described.⁽¹⁰⁾

2.5.2  Eidetic reduction (disclosing activities)

Eidetic means to penetrate to the essential characteristics that make possible the phenomenon of education’s appearance in its real meaning. Thus, essential characteristics are those fundamental structures (with their essences) that give meaning to the pedagogical. The pedagogical (reality of educating) will lose its authentic meaning if such an “essential characteristic” [isn’t essential because it:]

• is thought away
• is acted away
• is removed after the separating
• is viewed as contradictories
• cannot be hermeneutically questioned
• is faultily named
• is not enlivened
• cannot be used categorically.

Eidetic reduction can be viewed as a research aim. Various methods of research can be used for this.

2.5.3  Phenomenological structuring (Constructing)

Phenomenological structuring refers to structure forming. Structure forming occurs through determining the co-existentiality and co-essentiality of the essences.⁽¹¹⁾

Co-existentiality requires a common being-there

When two essences only can be-there if they are related to each other, they also must possess a common being-there with each other by which both include common parts of each other otherwise we are involved with separate realities that stand apart from each other as independent things and then there no longer are real essences. This common being-there can be called a structure.

Co-essentiality requires a common being-such-and-such

If essences only possess their own being-such-and-such in relation to other essences then they also must possess a common being-such-and-such in which they have a part. When this is not the case, one is not involved with the real essentials of a particular being (structure or situation). Only those essences whose actualizations lead to proper adulthood can be essences of the fundamental pedagogical structures.

Actualizing the phenomenological reductions (with their steps of thinking) can occur by way of the essences of the course of a lesson, i.e., by means that promote the unlocking of reality. A question that arises immediately is on what basis can it be expected that there is a connection (relation) between phenomenology and the course of a lesson. The answer is that both are primarily involved in unlocking reality so its essentials can appear.

Essences of the course of a lesson are defined⁽¹²⁾ and the possible ways they are valuable as a form of the course of phenomenology are shown so that these essences are redefined in terms of the phenomenological reductions. This will be done in tabular form below.

In the second column of the table the unlocking essences appear and in the third column their effects on phenomenological application are described.

Actualizing the phenomenological reductions (with their steps of thinking) can occur by way of actualizing the modes of learning. On what basis can this be possible? Answer: Both involve acquiring meaningful contents, i.e., acquiring essences (with their meaningful relationships).

The contribution a research procedure can make to “learning about reality” as learning problem solving (hypothesis testing) will determine if there can be a place for it in the plan of research.

5.1  The term phenomenology is a combination of two Greek words, phainomai that means “I appear”, “I show myself” and legoo that means “I speak”, “I let it be heard” (I in this case is reality itself). Phenomenology, then, is expression of the essence of a matter; essences are made visible.⁽¹⁴⁾

5.2  A phenomenological method is a method that:

• allows real essentiality to come out of being hidden⁽¹⁵⁾
• by addressing (acquiring perspective), discussing (dialogue, intersubjective verification), and speaking through (radical reflection) leads to illumination and understanding.⁽¹⁶⁾
• through illuminating disclosure, essences are lifted from being hidden.⁽¹⁷⁾
• is only meaningful if it leads to ontological understanding.⁽¹⁸⁾
• is sensitive when within it cognitive understanding and affective penetration form a unity.⁽¹⁹⁾

5.3  A phenomenologist is someone who allows reality to describe and explain itself as it would have done if it could have.⁽²⁰⁾